British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[
Home]
[
Databases]
[
World Law]
[
Multidatabase Search]
[
Help]
[
Feedback]
European Court of Human Rights
You are here:
BAILII >>
Databases >>
European Court of Human Rights >>
Stanislav Vladimirovich MARTYNOV v Russia - 43380/06 [2012] ECHR 945 (22 May 2012)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2012/945.html
Cite as:
[2012] ECHR 945
[
New search]
[
Contents list]
[
Printable RTF version]
[
Help]
FIRST
SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
43380/06
Stanislav Vladimirovich MARTYNOV
against Russia
The
European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 22 May
2012 as a Committee composed of:
Peer Lorenzen,
President,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Julia Laffranque,
judges,
and André Wampach,
Deputy Section Registrar,
Having
regard to the above application lodged on 9 September 2006,
Having
deliberated, decides as follows
PROCEDURE
The
applicant, Mr Stanislav Vladimirovich Martynov, is a Russian national
who was born in 1983 and lives in the town of Shakhty, Rostov Region.
He was represented before the Court by Mr A. Prudchenko, a lawyer
practising in Shakhty.
The
Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by
Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the
European Court of Human Rights.
The
applicant complained that that the criminal proceedings against him
had been unfair, in particular, given his impossibility to confront a
leading prosecution witness, and that his detention after conviction
had been unlawful.
By
a letter dated 18 January 2012, sent by registered post, the
applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed
for submission of the observations had expired on 5 December 2011 and
that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s
representative’s attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a)
of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case
out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the
conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the
application. No response followed.
THE LAW
The
Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be
regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the
meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in
accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds
no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as
defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the
continued examination of the case.
In
view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the
list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
André
Wampach Peer Lorenzen
Deputy Registrar President